NotKindle.com ( No Worries ) . 100% FREE

not automatically produce more deportations. The government needs the practical machinery to carry them out. ## So what should change? If this book is going to propose solutions, this is an obvious place to start. **Make the system faster.** Not unfair. Not careless. Faster. Give asylum cases enough staff and resources to be dealt with promptly. Prioritise cases that can be resolved quickly. Deal with genuine protection claims properly. Deal with clearly unsuccessful claims promptly. And when somebody has exhausted the legal process and has no right to remain, make sure there is a realistic mechanism for removal. That would change the entire system. It would reduce the backlog. It would reduce the time people spend in hotels and other temporary accommodation. It would reduce costs. And, perhaps most importantly, it would give the public a clearer understanding of what happens after somebody arrives. ## The uncomfortable truth There is no completely painless immigration system. If Britain wants to control its borders, there will always be difficult decisions. Some people will disagree with those decisions. Some cases will be complicated. Some people will have genuine reasons for seeking protection. Others will not qualify. The answer cannot be to pretend that everybody is the same. Nor can the answer be to pretend that the system is working perfectly when there are obvious delays and frustrations. The answer is a system that makes decisions. **Quickly. Fairly. Clearly.** And then acts on those decisions. That brings us to perhaps the biggest question of all. If somebody is refused and Britain decides they should leave, **where do they go?** That is where the next part of the problem begins. # Chapter Seven ## If They Have No Right to Stay, Then What? This is probably one of the simplest questions in the whole debate. If somebody has been through the asylum process, has been refused, has no other legal right to remain in Britain, and has exhausted the available appeals, then the obvious question is: **Why aren't they simply sent home?** It is a fair question. And it is important to say something clearly. A refusal to remain in Britain should mean something. If a country has immigration laws but cannot enforce the final decisions made under those laws, public confidence in the entire system will eventually suffer. But there is a difference between deciding that somebody should leave and actually getting them out of the country. That difference is where much of the difficulty lies. ## Britain cannot always return someone whenever it wants Suppose Britain decides that a person is a citizen of another country. Britain may want to return that person. But the other country may need to confirm their identity. It may need to issue travel documents. It may refuse to accept them. There may be an appeal still outstanding. There may be another legal reason why the removal cannot take place immediately. So the British Government can say: **?You have no right to remain.?** But it still needs a practical way of carrying out that decision. That is where international cooperation becomes important. ## The return agreement Britain needs countries to cooperate with returns. That means negotiating agreements that work in practice. Not just agreements that look good in a press release. If Britain regularly sends people back to a particular country, that country needs to identify its citizens and accept their return. That may require diplomatic negotiations. It may involve trade. It may involve development assistance. It may involve security cooperation. It may involve other relationships between governments. None of this means Britain should act unlawfully or punish